The Quintessential Outsider

Finally, I had my last IIM interview today afternoon. It was IIM Bangalore, and being one of the ‘big’ ones, and considering that my A and C interviews were just okay, I was determined to do well. In the run-up to this day, I read interviews on Pagalguy, read stuff from Wikipedia which I thought could be useful, spoke to some friends to get their inputs, and generally fretted more than I had for any other interview so far.

I reached the centre about 20 minutes before time, and generally started speaking to some of the other candidates. When I came out to make a call, I saw the interviewers walk by, presumably after having their lunch. I noticed that one of them was the same professor who had interviewed me two years ago.

After some time, one of the other professors came down to our waiting room, and announced the names of candidates in his panel. Mine was the first name, which also meant that I was the first one to be interviewed in that panel. Anyway, that comes later. We walked behind that professor to the interview room, and when I entered, I found that the other professor in that panel was the one I had noticed downstairs, the one who had interviewed me before.

We were told to take our places according to the order, and were given the instructions – a case would be given, we would have 10 minutes to think and prepare our points, then 15 minutes to discuss, and then another 10 minutes to write a summary of the discussion and answer a couple of other questions. The case given to us was ’should the government set up more IITs and IIMs, or should it use that money for primary and secondary education?’ Some points on this issue which are commonly found in the media were given as part of the case.

The discussion was the worst I have seen so far. There were about 8 people in the group, and no one seemed to be willing to listen to the others, clearly define the problem, discuss solutions or move to a conclusion. Everyone was just trying to make their own points, even if that meant cross-talking and trying to shout others down. I made a couple of forays into the discussion, and my voice and tone are such that everyone stopped and listened (1-2 guys in the group actually came up to me after the discussion and said as much). I managed to make a couple of points in these forays, but I had some more as well. However, in the other attempted forays, I decided to stop after uttering a few words because everyone seemed to be lost in their own voices.

I understand that this was one topic where everyone had a lot to say, but the sad thing is that most of the stuff spoken was irrelevant, digressive, and generally spoken to hog the time. If people had bothered to listen to each others’ points, not repeat stuff, and actually try to come to some conclusion, it would have been better. A few people tried to get the discussion back on track, but in the face of aggression, everyone usually turns up their volume. After about 15 minutes, the professor asked us to stop, and asked me if I had anything to add. I was a little surprised, but I was careful not to repeat the mistake I made after the IIMC GD, and finished with a few points which I had noted on my paper but could not bring out in the discussion.

Along with the written summary, there were two other questions, on ‘who do you think was the most influential person in the 20th century, and why?’ and ‘what are your career goals and how does a PGP from IIMB fit into it?’ I answered them just in time, and then we were asked to go downstairs and wait.

I went down, had some water, spoke to some guys, and came back up in about 5 minutes. After some time, one of the professors came out and called me for the interview. From here on, I’ll refer to the professors as P1 (the one who had interviewed me before, and who came out to call me) and P2 (the one who came to call us for the GD). In the interview room, P1 was to my left and P2 to my right.

(After going in, wishing them and sitting down)
P2: So, is your name Chitranshu or Vijay?
Me: Sir, my name is Chitranshu. Vijay is my father’s name.
P2: But Mathur is a North Indian surname, right?
Me: Yes sir.
P2: So why do you write your name in this form, surname followed by name and father’s name?
Me: Sir, I always wrote my name as Chitranshu Mathur, but after my 10th standard exams, I got my certificate with this name, which was according to the convention in Maharashtra. So, it has stuck on all my official certificates since then.
P2: OK. So… (looking at my form) you have just started working, right?
Me: Yes sir, I took up this job after CAT, in December last year. Before that, I graduated in 2006, and was preparing for the UPSC civil service exams (spoke about those exams, the result I got recently, and that I appeared for CAT alongside and was now going through the interviews).
P2: And have you appeared for CAT earlier?
Me: Yes sir, I appeared once before, in my final year of college, that was CAT 2005. I got all 6 calls, went for the Ahmedabad and Bangalore interviews, and in fact, in the Bangalore interview, (smiling and looking at P1) Prof. Ganesh was one of my interviewers. In fact, at that time, I had told him that I would be appearing for the UPSC exams, which I have now. (P1 smiled and muttered something to P2, which sounded to me like ‘I told you I had seen him before’ or something)
P2: So what happened in those interviews?
Me: Sir, I did not convert the A and B calls, and I did not go for the other four interviews. In campus placements also, I sat for a few company interviews. From all this, I came to know where I stood, and I proceeded with my UPSC exam preparations.
P2: But why this fascination with the civil services? Is your father in the IAS? (looking at my form)
Me: No sir. (told about my own thought process and how I arrived at the decision, and that my father had the opposite role, of asking ‘why do you want to do this’, but once I had decided, he said I should do whatever I want, but not waste too much time. Finished off by saying that even now, I have two more attempts left and age on my side, but I do not want to appear again because I think I have put in whatever effort I could. People say ‘you should have gone to Delhi to prepare’ just like they say ‘go to Kota if you want to prepare for IIT-JEE’, but I didn’t want to do that)
P2: What were your subjects in the UPSC exams?
Me: Geography and political science.
P2: (with a look of surprise) Why… after studying engineering physics from IIT?
Me: (told about why social sciences are better for these exams, and my own interest in them. He countered by saying that he had heard that physics and maths was a good combination, but conceded that if I was interested in some other subjects, so be it)
Then, he changed track and asked…
P2: OK, so since you have majored in physics, tell me about string theory.
I mentioned that I had not studied string theory, and that I was anyway out of touch with physics, but he insisted, saying that I should be able to tell more than what a ‘layman’ like him knew. I said whatever I could, that it was a theory that the four fundamental forces of nature arise out of different vibrational modes of strings. He asked me to name the four fundamental forces, which I did correctly, but after some stuttering indecision. However, I could not tell more in detail about string theory or about its originator.
P2: (after about 2-3 minutes of grilling and only getting half-baked information with little confidence from me) OK, now about political science. (I waited with baited breath) You must be knowing that the Rajya Sabha elections happened over the weekend. So, how would you analyse the results and their impact on the ruling party? Give me your analysis, not what I read in the Times of India.
Me: (smiling) Sir, I too read about it only in the Times of India. (Gave my analysis of the results)
P2: OK, and what about Vilasrao Deshmukh? What effect would it have on him?
(I mentioned his decreasing influence, the Vidarbha crisis and the negative impact it had on his image. Finally, P2 just made the question more pointed…)
P2: So why is Deshmukh not being sacked?
Me: Sir, maybe they have no options.
P2: Oh, they have many options.
Me: Then maybe it’s because of his proximity to Sonia Gandhi.
P2: He is not being sacked because he belongs to a powerful community which they cannot afford to anger.
Me: (finally dawning upon me) Yes sir, he is the only Maratha leader they have.
P2: (with a dismissive look) OK, so what else… yes, geography! Which state in India has the longest coastline?
Me: Sir, it’s Gujarat.
P2: (smiling) OK, so you know something at least. (turning to P1, who had been smiling all along, and occasionally broadening his smile when P2 cracked a joke on me )
P1: (looking at my form) OK, tell me something about your current job.
I spoke about my job, and from there, a discussion ensued, and somewhere in between, I mentioned Pagalguy. P1 asked what I knew about Pagalguy, and then P2 interrupted.
P2: So, why pagal? Are the owners of that site pagal or the people who go to that site?
Me: Sir, the users are given some ‘pagal’ rating when they register. I don’t know much about all that, but it’s useful. For example, I came to know that this question on ‘most influential person’ is being asked, by reading the discussions on Pagalguy.
P2: OK, and what have you written?… Gandhi. So, did you get this answer also from there?
Me: No sir (smiling). I read that some other people had also written that, but I sincerely feel it was Gandhi.
Then, I started speaking about Gandhi, his philosophies, the things he was criticised about, and yet, why he was still a great man.
P2: OK, tell me one thing. If you have seen that movie Munnabhai 2, there is that scene where Sanjay Dutt is slapped once, he turns his other cheek, he is slapped again, and then he retaliates, because Gandhi has not told him what to do after two slaps. So, was that what Gandhi said, that you tolerate upto a certain point and then retaliate?
Me: No sir, I think that movie reduced Gandhi to a caricature. (spoke more about his philosophy)
P2: But, Gandhi was the one who said that India should fight alongside Britain in World War II? Where did his non-violence go then?
I defended that, and somewhere in this discussion, I also mentioned Gandhi’s influence on Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. P2 disagreed, saying that that was just lip-service, and that Nelson Mandela had adopted violent tactics earlier. I said that as long as he changed in the end, that was good. And thus, the discussion went on, until I said that Gandhi was just a human and he should not be put on a pedestal. He agreed, and I extended that argument saying that no one should be put on a pedestal. For example, even Jesus Christ was just a great human with a certain philosophy.
P2: (interrupting) OK, now you are getting into dangerous territory. (collecting the papers in front of him) See, in front a group of people, you never know who might get offended by what. So, it’s best to stay away from such dangerous territory.
I nodded, and they both said, ‘ok, that’s all, thank you, and please send the next person in’.

I thanked them and left with a smile on my face. There had been moments when I was not too confident of what I was saying, and times when I said ‘I don’t know’, but on the whole, I got a good feeling. That was also because the interviewers had been smiling throughout. Sometimes, it was in a mocking way, and sometimes agreeing with me, but on the whole, it helped. And the latter half of the interview was really good, I felt. I don’t know how much impact the GD will have, though, on the final result.

So now, I am keeping my fingers crossed till the final results. That does not mean that I will not write anything till then, though.

OK, maybe it was not chaos, but I definitely saw more confusion today at the IIM Calcutta GD/PI than at any of the other interviews so far. The day began with a little tension for me, as I was stuck in traffic and reached the interview centre just 5 minutes before the scheduled time. On reaching the waiting room, besides the usual bunch of 25-30 nervous candidates, I saw two men seated at a table calling out names and looking at some documents.

I asked a guy seated next to me, and he informed me that they were asking for photocopies of all the documents related to your work experience and extra-curricular activities. Now, some people keep extra photocopies of anything and everything for such situations, but I was carrying only the necessary stuff, as the call letter said that you had to bring only the originals for verification, and not submit any photocopies. The guy next to me said, “I know that, but they have some different version of the letter, which says that you have to bring photocopies of everything. Anyway, they are saying that you can go and get it done after your interview”.

Meanwhile, the clock struck 9:30, and the two men got up and called out the names of candidates in each of the three panels, and asked us to go to the respective rooms (It was then that I noticed their heavy Bong accent). We went down, and waited outside our room. The neighbouring panel called the candidates in, while our group was still waiting. After a while, we heard the voice of one of the professors, probably talking on his cell-phone, so we thought we might be called in a few minutes, after he is done with the phone call. Finally, one of the two Bong babus came down and saw us waiting, and asked us to go inside. As we walked in to the room, the professors smiled at all of us and looked as if they had been waiting for us all this while.

Thankfully, the professors (three of them, two gentlemen and a lady) looked vastly different from the Bong babus outside. All of us just sauntered in, waiting to hear any instructions from them, but they kept smiling. Finally, when they asked us to sit, one of us asked, “Can we sit in any order?” and the lady replied, “Yes yes, sit wherever you want”. Immediately, one of the other profs said, “No no, I think there is some order…” (called out our names in order, as we sat down).

For the GD, we were given a case: A consulting firm goes to a b-school to recruit, but the students there play the ‘waiting game’ with them, i.e. they do not accept the offers immediately, get better offers from other companies and then come and bargain with them, etc. So, the HR team is discussing new strategies to overcome this. While they are discussing options like giving a short time-span for the recruits to convey their acceptance of the offer, the CEO comes up with an opposite suggestion – give the students an option of accepting the offer anytime within the next one year. So, for one year, they can go and ‘test the market’, and then come back and join the company. What are the pros and cons of this approach?

The GD was good, and everyone got enough opportunity to speak. I made a couple of points, saying that this idea was good for the students, as it gave them an additional choice. It was also good for the company, because it would help them differentiate themselves from their competitors. Also, most people, in the beginning of their career, look to try out new things, and switch jobs, before settling down in a particular job. By offering this choice, the company might end up as the beneficiary of this process instead of the victim.

All in all, it was good, but a couple of things which I could have done better - I was speaking when time ran out, so I was a little ‘caught by surprise’ when the professor interrupted. Then, he asked us to summarize, and unlike the other GDs, we all had to talk instead of writing down a summary. So, I began to write something, when the professor said, “No no, don’t write down anything. Just say whatever you have to, some point that you missed, or a summary of what was discussed, whatever. And since you (looking at me) were the one I interrupted, maybe you can begin the summarizing by completing your point”. I began talking, and was looking at the professors, when one of them motioned towards the group, so I shifted my glance towards them, and just repeated the few points that I had made during the GD. The others followed, and I felt that it would have been better if I had summarized later, as that would have given me time to collect all the thoughts and put up a good summary.

Anyway, so the GD ended, and I was second in line for the interview, so I waited outside along with a few others, while some went upstairs to the babus to get their verification done. We waited for quite some time, and were wondering what the professors were doing, as they hadn’t even taken our interview forms, so they had nothing about us to read or spend time on. Our neighbouring group had, in the meantime, finished their GD and the first guy’s interview, and the second one went in, when finally, our first interviewee was called in. He came out in about 15 minutes, with an ‘okayish’ expression on his face, and it was another ten minutes before I was finally called in.

From here, I’ll refer to the interviewers as P1, P2 and P3 (from left to right, with the lady in the centre).
P3: Please give me your form. (I hand it over)
P1: So while he is going through your form, I’ll give you a problem. Don’t worry, it is not a maths problem (Hahaha…). There is a food company, which has been around for about 20 years. Now, some problem occurs with one of their products in a particular region – some people fall ill after having it and so on. So, the company is trying to find out the reason, and the R&D head insists that their processes are very thorough, and that there is nothing wrong with their product, while the legal team says that it would be better to recall the product until everything is checked. However, there will be costs associated with the recall, along with the name of the company being affected and so on. So, what should the company do?
Me: Sir, there are a few things here which I’ll have to assume.
P1: Oh, you can ask me for any additional information.
Me: For example, how much time will it take for the company to check everything? If it is not going to take too long, then it does not make sense to recall it, and then launch it again soon after. But if it is going to take too long, then they should not take any risks and recall it immediately.
P1: OK, the checks are not going to be done by the company, but by some external agency, which will certify whether everything is alright. And this whole process will take, say, a month.
Me: Well, in that case, the company should recall the product. Also, you mentioned that besides the financial costs, there will also be an effect on the name of the company. But, I guess if something like this has happened, then someone must have already noticed the issue and the company’s name must be affected already. And the more they try to push things under the carpet, the worse it will be. So, brand name and reputation is something which should not be compromised, even for the sake of saving some money. And if the company is really on the right side, then it is going to come out unscathed from this.
(He seemed satisfied with my answer, and motioned to P3 to continue)

Now, I don’t remember the exact questions from here on, but P3 asked something about my job and what I had done for the last two years, and I explained everything, from my CAT attempt and campus placement experience in my final year to attempting the UPSC exams to IMS to my current job. There were the obvious questions, on what would you do if you get through the IAS/IFS as well as IIM A, B or C. My replies were mostly non-committal, as I said I am just focusing on doing well in all the interviews right now, and do not want to ‘count my chickens before they hatch’. Then, the lady moved on to what I thought was the role of a diplomat vis-à-vis a bureaucrat and a business executive. I spoke of the differences as well as the similarities, and from there, it went on to my short-term and long-term goals.

She then asked me why I had aspired to be a diplomat when in today’s globalizing world, countries and governments are becoming increasingly irrelevant. This was discussed at some length, as all the three professors chipped in with their own points on this, even joking that ‘things are changing so rapidly, we won’t need diplomats, you will become jobless’. And so it went on for about 10 minutes. My reply to these questions was mostly on the lines that it is in fact the diplomats who have the biggest role to play in bringing about this change. For example, it is the European diplomats who have been instrumental in building bridges and forming the EU out of the different European countries.

There was also a question on ‘who do you think makes all these decisions, at the UN, WTO, etc.?’ I replied that these decisions were made by governments, and of course, in today’s scenario, the business world has an interest and a say in these decisions. Also, since most of the powerful countries in the world today are democracies, the people of those countries have a say, however indirect it might seem. For example, if we do not agree with the Indian government, we can protest and the government will have to consider our opinion, even if it does not do so immediately.

Somewhere in this discussion, I slipped in the point that even in the business world, family-owned businesses are giving way to corporations where the CEOs are democratically elected. They didn’t seem to agree with this point too much, as their expressions and the tone of their voice suggested. One of them said, “But everywhere I look, I can see only Ambanis, Tatas, and other such families”. Then they asked me for an example of a family-owned business where the CEO is ‘democratically elected’. I was not sure, but I mentioned Wipro, my point being that even though Azim Premji still holds a majority stake in the company, he has not got his family members into important positions. They asked me the CEO’s name, which I did not know, and I was not even sure whether the CEO was truly democratically elected or handpicked by Azim Premji. But my point was that it is not just a single family’s absolute reign over all the resources of a business, at least in the biggest corporations of the world.

Towards the end of the interview, P3 asked me two questions, “If you represent India at the UN, what would be your three most important concerns?” and “What were your subjects at the UPSC exam?” In reply to the former, I mentioned changes in the approach to tackling terrorism, the decision-making at the WTO and the whole issue of free trade v/s fair trade, and the issue of expanding the Security Council to include more permanent members.

That was the end, and they asked me if I had any questions for them. I hadn’t thought of any, so I refused, as I didn’t want to come up with something silly on the spot. After the interview, I went to get photocopies of all my documents, and when I went up to those babus, I realised that I had already given my interview form to the professors in my panel. So I had to go back to them, get the form, take it to the babus who would verify everything and attach the copies, and then go and give it to the professors again.

Finally, I left the place around noon, came home, and just crashed on the bed.

General opinion: I think my performance was OK. I did not do too well, but I did not screw it up either. The interviewers did not seem very happy, but they were not frowning either; they had a generic smile on their faces throughout. When, in reply to their questions about my career choices, long and short-term goals, and my opinion on politics and the world in general, I gave generally diplomatic answers, one of them said, “He’s already talking like those MBA types”. I am not sure whether it was a good thing or a bad thing, but I restricted myself to telling the facts, and a general opinion on what I think is right, and not extreme rhetoric for or against any point of view.

And yes, for some reason, even though I remember pretty much everything from the interview, I do not remember it in an order proper enough to be constructed into a conversation format which I have followed for my previous blog posts. For that, a friend had suggested some days back that I carry a recorder into the interview.

Maybe this format is not as conducive to reading as the conversational one, so I’ll try to do better next time.

As promised, I am back with my next interview experience, IIM Indore, which happened yesterday morning. I reached the venue by 8:30 am, and when the groups were announced, I was relieved to know that I was the first candidate in my group, so unlike the previous interviews, I wouldn’t have to wait too long for my turn.

We went in for the GD, and were handed a one-page case to read for 5 minutes. It was about a successful businesswoman who heads a large BPO firm (I am not sure what they meant by large, because later in the case, it was mentioned that the firm has about 50 employees). The employees in her firm, and in the sector as a whole, are facing problems because of harassing calls made by US or UK citizens who resent the outsourcing of jobs to India. Also, the safety of employees, especially women, has come under media attention recently. So she has to take some measures to tackle these issues, and she goes to discuss it with her business partner, who manages the financial and administrative part (while she is the ‘face of the company’). He says she can take measures, but without any financial burden, as the company is planning an upgradation, etc. All this comes as a surprise to her and she feels left out of these decisions made by her partner. What should she do?

The discussion was strictly OK. We were given 12 minutes, and with only 6 people in the group, I thought everyone would have enough time to speak. But a couple of guys seemed too enthusiastic (or actually, nervous.. or maybe they just loved to hear their own voice, even if they didn’t have any points), and hogged most of the time. I made a couple of forays, saying that all that is being discussed is fine, but the critical thing is for her to communicate all this tactfully to her partner. Of course, there are many solutions if one goes to look for them, but proper communication between the partners is essential for those solutions to work. I know that I generally talk lesser than I should in GDs, but sometimes, that’s because I don’t see the point in arguing with someone whose only concern is to hog the time, and I feel that there is always the interview to show what I really am. Plus, today I felt, it’s only IIM Indore, after all.

Anyway, the GD got over, and we were all asked to write a summary of the discussion. After that, one of the professors said that they would call us in random order, and I thought to myself, ‘what the hell, even today I’ll have to wait for my interview’. One of the candidates said then that he hadn’t brought his CAT admit card, which slightly incensed the professor, but he finally told him to get a photocopy of some identification along with the original one. We went outside to wait, and the second guy in the group was the first to be called in. I chatted with the others in the meantime.

After about 20 minutes, that guy came out with a very serious and tense look on his face. We asked him about the interview, and he said it was OK, and ‘thoda stress tha’, and that I was next, and I should go in after 3 minutes. I got up and went to the door of the interview room. After some time, I knocked the door, I heard ‘come in’, I tried opening the door, I heard ‘come in’ again and louder this time, and finally, one of the professors came up and opened the door, and asked me, ‘couldn’t you hear us’. I said, ‘yes sir, I could, but I couldn’t open the door’. It was then that he realised that that door could be opened only from inside, or by inserting a card key from outside. There were 2 professors in the panel, say L (to my left) and R (to my right). Here’s what happened after that:

R: (who opened the door, and then came and sat and looked at my name) So, your name is Mathur?
Me: No sir, that’s my surname. My first name is Chitranshu.
R: Oh, so what does that mean?
Me: Sir, ‘chitr-’ means picture, and it is also derived from our family deity, who is Chitragupta. And ‘anshu’ is a suffix like in ‘Himanshu’ etc.
R: But does it have any meaning?
Me: Yes sir, ‘ansh’ means a part.
R: So, what does Chitragupta do?
Me: (smiling) Sir, as far as I know, he sits next to Yamaraj with an account of everyone’s lives.
R: (with a smile) OK, so when you meet Chitragupta, please put in a good word for us.
(On hearing this, I am like ‘WHAT???’, but in the meantime, L begins)
L: So, what do your friends call you, Chitranshu or Vijay or…?
Me: No sir, Vijay is my father’s name. On a professional or formal level, I am called Chitranshu.
L: OK, so Chitranshu, tell us about yourself. And hand over your certificates please.
Me: (after handing over the file) blah blah blah… end with the fact that I appeared for IAS exams after graduating from IIT.
L: Oh, so what happened to that IAS dream?
Me: Sir, I cleared the prelims, then appeared for the Mains in Oct-Nov 2007, and their results are due sometime in the second half of March.
L: So, what is your order of preference in those services?
Me: blah blah.
L: Oh, so it is either IFS/IAS or IIMs?
Me: Yes sir.
L: OK, so you must be very good at GK?
(I didn’t quite catch the word GK, so he repeated, calling it ‘general studies’ this time. I nodded and smiled, waiting for some questions on it)
L: OK, so can you tell us something about China? I mean, China is a communist country, but now, it has a capitalistic approach, especially if you see Shanghai etc. So how are these two opposites reconciled?
Me: Sir, when China originally turned communist about 60 years ago, it was under Mao Zedong until 1978, and he had this very strict regime, and things were tried like the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. However, after 1978, they have adopted the current approach, what they call ‘market communism’. And now, it’s not a question of capitalism or communism, but what’s good for the country. So they are doing what they think is good for them, whether it is their own economy, or increasing their influence in the world, not just by interacting with the US and the EU, but also nations from Africa or Latin America.
L: But, do you foresee any problems with their current approach?
Me: Yes sir, it is still a one-party state, and you cannot criticize the government at all. Also, there are human rights issues, and for developing places like Shanghai, they have had to relocate millions of people.
L: What do you know about Cuba?
Me: (a bit surprised at this sudden change of track, but soon, I realised that this was a rapid-fire grilling) Sir, Cuba is, if I am not wrong, the first country to turn communist in the Western Hemisphere. And, just yesterday… (I was going to speak about Fidel Castro giving the reins to Raul, but L interrupted)
L: Have you heard of the Bay of Pigs?
Me: Yes sir, it is a region in Cuba, where, in Kennedy’s time, there was an invasion. I mean, not directly, but CIA sponsored some Cuban rebels…
(L again interrupted, and thus the grilling went on for about 10 minutes. I don’t remember ALL the questions, but some of them, and not necessarily in order, were as follows)
L: What do you know about the WTO?
L: Who is Hugo Chavez?
L: What do you think about India’s chances of becoming a permanent member of the UN Security Council?
L: What is a mixed economy?
L: Do you think India’s leaders did the right thing in 1947 when they opted for a mixed economy?
L: What is ‘demographic dividend’?
L: What is the Narmada Bachao Andolan?
L: Do you read any books?
L: (after I mentioned Amartya Sen’s ‘Argumentative Indian’ and his take on the question of identity) Do you agree with what Raj Thackeray is doing now in Mumbai?
L: What can be done to tackle a situation like this?

(I answered all of these, and I did not stop with a brief answer and wait for the next question. Instead, I went on with more details, and my take on it, until he fired the next question. And then, he finally came up with one I didn’t know)
L: Who is R.K. Karanjia?
Me: Umm… I don’t know, sir.
L: (smiling and turning to R) OK, do you have any questions?
R asked me some questions about my present job, about what is Engineering Physics, what are the prospects if one wants to stay in that field, and then he moved on to the following:
R: So Chitranshu, you know that India and the US are very similar, in the sense that both are democracies, both have certain freedoms for their citizens, etc. And yet we see that the US often favours China, or even Pakistan, more than India. Why do you think that is so?
Me: Sir, in today’s world, diplomacy is not practised the way it was in Pandit Nehru’s time, when we would think that we would talk only to like-minded countries. This is the age of ‘realpolitik’, and every country does what is in its best interest. So, even the nuclear deal that President Bush helped push through, was for the US interest. It also helps India, but India has to take care of that part.
L: So what do you think about the nuclear deal?
Me: Sir, I think the CPM is being very dogmatic in its opposition to the deal. I mean, yes, there might be some genuine concerns expressed by scientists and others, but instead of an open discussion on those concerns, we just see a lot of rhetoric. And their stand that ‘just because it’s the US, we cannot have that deal’ is not right, as it will also help open doors for India with other countries. Now, of course, the US has passed it, so there are the IAEA talks and the NSG and so on…
R: But, don’t we have enough nuclear fuel reserves in our own country?
Me: Yes sir, we have reserves of thorium and uranium, but they must not be enough, because we have tried to be self-reliant for the last 30 years or so. And at this critical juncture, we need more fuel…
R: So can’t we get it from other countries?
Me: (reiterating my point) Yes, but for all of that, we have to go through with the IAEA talks and NSG approval. In today’s world, we cannot just trade with one country and ignore the others.

I don’t remember now if there were any other such questions, but after that, R moved on to the extra-curriculars page in my form, and asked me what those were. I explained all those things I had written, and then they said, ‘OK, that’s enough’.

I came out with a huge smile on my face, as I knew I had done really well. I think this was my best performance so far because they went on asking about the things I know, instead of picking on some things that I didn’t know and grilling me on them. But I have to be good with dealing with that situation also, especially with two big ones (C on 13th March and B on 27th March) coming up. I told the next guy in line to go after 5 minutes, and waited for some time, chatting with the others.

When I reached home, my dad called up, and while I was telling him about the interview, he told me that R.K. Karanjia was the former editor of Blitz who died last year.

Anyway, so I’ll be back with the next one after 13th March, or maybe something more interesting before that.

As promised, I am back with a narration of my WIMWI experience (thanks to Zutty for telling me what that acronym means ). The run-up to the ‘big day’ was quite eventful too, e.g. my reaching the campus at 2 the previous night because of a train delay, but I shall start from the time that I got ready and reached the venue.

This time, there were more familiar faces around, partly because more IITB guys had their interviews scheduled the same day, the ones in the afternoon slot came around in the morning as well to see the atmosphere, and partly because some of the others have the same slot for all or most of their interviews as I have, so we tend to run into each other and exchange greetings and information and questions and answers even if we do not know or remember each other’s names. Anyway, the hottest piece of discussion that morning was that there is not going to be any GD this time, because nothing about a GD had been mentioned in the call letter. However, when the professors came out and announced the groups, and asked us to troop in to the respective rooms, it seemed that people had read too much into the letter.

As soon as we were all seated inside, though, the professors threw a shocker (it was not so shocking for me, I am more than happy that there was no GD) – they would give a topic, and we would have to write an essay in 10 minutes on a page that we had been asked to leave blank on our interview form. The topic given was ‘Worsening female to male ratio in India’ – something on which you can start writing immediately (unlike the IIML GD topic), and comfortably fill up a page in 10 minutes. After we were done, we were asked to wait outside and come in the same order for the interviews.

Once again, I did not spend too much time listening to others’ experiences or their preparation for the interview. I did listen to one friend’s experience, though, and it confirmed what I already knew, that there would be some grilling on academics, some on general career plans, and some on current affairs. And unlike the previous two interviews, this one would be ‘real grilling’. Anyway, my turn came, and I entered the interview room. From here on, let’s call the three interviewers P1, P2 and P3 (from left to right).

P2: What is your first name? (they were a bit confused about my first name and my father’s name, which becomes my middle name according to the convention in Maharashtra, so I clarified that) Please show us your certificates. (I hand them over) OK, tell us about yourself (standard blah blah, taking care to include some things for which there was no room in the interview form). OK, what is this Engineering Physics? (I tell them what it is. They confirm whether it is a 4-year course or a 5-year integrated course etc.)
P2: OK, so Chitranshu, since you are a physicist (umm…), could you tell me what are the different forces that act on the spoke of a bicycle wheel?
(extends a paper and pencil towards me)
Me: (after thinking a bit, and drawing a simple wheel, with one spoke) Sir, there will be one force inwards from the outer rim, and one from the centre…
P2: Could you draw it on paper and show me, instead of talking in the air? Can you show the free body diagram?
(Well yes, I was talking in the air, but they always make such comments to stress you out and see how you withstand it)
(I draw a spoke horizontally and something resembling a free body diagram)
P2: Horizontal is not so interesting. Draw it in the vertical position. That would be more interesting.
(I draw a vertical spoke, a part of the outer rim and the centre, a couple of arrows showing the forces, and a couple of equations)
P2: Don’t write too many equations. I do not want a detailed analysis. Just tell me what the forces are.
(HINT: The professor wanted me to draw a vertical spoke, not a horizontal one, which meant that there is a significant difference in the forces in the two positions which I had to account for in my explanation. Also, when he said he did not want equations or a detailed analysis, that meant that he was more interested in how I solved the problem and my demeanour while working on it instead of the actual solution. The questions posed will be different for everyone, but these basic things always apply.)
Me: Sir, there will be an inward force from the outer rim…
P2: What is it called?
Me: The normal reaction… (On a look of approval from him, I continue) And one force from the centre outwards to balance it. There is also the mass of the spoke…
P2: But that will be negligible.
Me: Umm, yes sir. And from the centre, there will be another force perpendicular to the spoke which will make it revolve.
P2: So, there will be an inward force and an outward force. What is this called?
Me: A couple? (I am just faffing now, but as long as I can pull it off, what the heck)
P2: So, will the spoke be under compression? (On seeing a look of confusion coming on my face) Or will it be under tension?
Me: Sir, I think it will be compression.
P2: Won’t it vary depending on the position of the spoke?
Me: Yes sir, of course it will, because the mg part will always be downwards, but…
P2: That’s OK. (turning to P1) Do you have any questions?

Now, I don’t remember verbatim the Q&A with P1, but his main emphasis was on why I prepared for the IAS exams, what I did in the meantime, my IMS experience (and when I said I liked teaching, whether I wanted to be a teacher), what is my current job, how does it fit in with my IIT degree, or since it doesn’t fit in, what do I ‘bring to the table’. The entire tone of questioning at such a time is such that it tends to stress you out and make you think negatively about what you have done so far and what you want to do in future, because unless you are really good with what you have studied so far, they will manage to ask something which you do not know, and then stress you out over it, and if you do answer everything correctly, they will ask you why you do not want to go for higher studies in that subject and why management instead. The key at this point is to stay calm and stick to what you think is right.

I think I did an OK job of that, because even though I readily (and honestly) answered all those questions, I could feel the tension in my face. During his grilling, P1 moved on to the following:

P1: So, if you do not get through the IIMs, what is your contingency plan? Do not say IAS or IFS, as that is not a contingency plan. (It is not, because entry into it is as tough if not tougher than IIMs, and also because I had mentioned that I want only the top two services which require a rank in the top 50-60)
Me: Sir, I am confident that I will get somewhere out of these options.
P3: (now getting into the act) No, that is not an answer. India went to play Bangladesh, but it lost in the first round. Reliance Power IPO… you see what happened.
Me: Sir, there is a difference between being confident and over-confident.
P3: No, I am not talking about over-confidence. It is about eliminating risk. Risk always tends to zero, it is never exactly zero. You are from IIT, you should know that much.
Me: Yes sir, but there is only a limit upto which you can make a list of options.
P1: So you don’t have any contingency plan?
Me: Well, in the short term, I might stay with my current job, but in the long term, I don’t know.
P1: (meanwhile, he looked at the permanent address in my form) So, your parents stay in UP?
Me: No sir, my father is a doctor in the Railways, and his job is transferable, so they don’t have any permanent address. That is my uncle’s address in UP.
P3: OK, have you heard about Reliance Fresh?
Me: Yes sir.
P3: What were the problems that Reliance Fresh faced in UP?
Me: Sir, as with any big retail chain, the small-time grocers are…
P3: No no, that is a general problem. Tell me, what was the problem in UP?
Me: Sir, in UP, after the BSP government came to power, they were not in favour of the Ambanis, who seem to be on good terms with the SP.
P3: So, what is the current status?
Me: (actually, I had no idea) I think now they have opened some stores there.
P3: OK, have you heard about the Sethusamudram project?
Me: Yes sir.
P3: Can you tell us what it is?
Me: Sir, the Sethusamudram project is about dredging a canal through the Adam’s Bridge, or Ram Setu, between India and Sri Lanka. The present Tamil Nadu government, and to some extent, the Centre, is in favour of it, while the BJP and other so-called nationalist parties are against it, saying that it is Lord Ram’s bridge and it should not be touched. But, beyond the politics of it, I think there are a lot of other issues. For example, there is the environmental angle, that if the canal is made, then Tamil Nadu and Kerala would be more vulnerable to events like the tsunami that occurred in December 2004. Also, it will be prone to piracy and terrorist attacks, because northern Sri Lanka is under the control of the LTTE. And, we cannot compare it to the Suez or Panama canal, where thousands of kilometres were reduced. Here, it is only a few hundred kilometres, and since the canal won’t be too deep, the ships will have to go slower, so even that should be accounted for.
(I saw this question as an opportunity to display both my knowledge and confidence, which I thought were lacking in the earlier answers. Opinions might differ on whether you should take sides on any current issue, but you have to display some thinking, and not just give dogmatic or diplomatic answers)
P3: OK, have you heard of the Tatas’ new car? What is it called?
Me: Sir, it’s the Tata Nano.
P3: Why Nano? What does it mean?
Me: Sir, Nano comes from a Greek word which is a prefix meaning ‘10 to the power of -9′. It is smaller than micro, so for example, we talk about nanotechnology and so on.
P3: Does it have any other meaning?
Me: Umm… I don’t think so.

I do not remember if any other questions were asked, but soon after, P1 looked at the ‘extra-curricular activities’ in my form, and confirmed what each of them were, and if they were at the Mumbai level or national level. And while I was explaining that, they said, ‘ OK, that’s enough. You can leave. Please take a toffee’.

I thought I had not done too well, but after I came out, while I was talking to the next guy in line, his sister (a first-year student there) said, ‘if you have actually said all this, you should get through. They try to stress everyone out like this, but you should just be chilled out’. I think this ’stressing out’ thing applied for most of the interviews in the morning slot, while the ones in the afternoon were all very cool. Whether it was because they were tired or something else, I don’t know. On the whole, I am not sure whether I have done well enough to get a final call, but that’s probably because it is IIMA, so you have to be in the top slot to make it. And after hearing of 100 percentilers not making it to IIMA, you know you can never rest on your percentile to take you through.

Anyway, the next one is IIM Indore on 26th February. I’ll be back with that experience, and maybe a post before that too.

I went for the IIM Kozhikode GD/PI yesterday, to Dadar, an area which some might think would be more tense than the rest of the city in the current situation. And yes, there were a lot of police and some paramilitary forces on the streets in that area. Anyway, that and what I did to celebrate Valentine’s Day is not what I am going to discuss here. Instead, I’ll come straight to the promised topic – a narration of the IIM-K GD/PI experience.

Once again, I had the afternoon slot, and I reached on time. However, we had to wait for about half an hour until the professors came and announced the groups. Again, I was in group 1, with nine others, which meant that my GD and PI was in the same room as it was for IIM-L. This time, though, I was seated 5th in a group of 10 people, which also meant that my interview finished earlier than last time.

Anyway, coming to the GD, the topic was something about success and failure. I do not remember it verbatim, but the gist was that there are failures behind every success. Only after getting up and learning from a failure can one succeed, etc. We only had 2 minutes to think and write down some points on it (which is how it is in most GDs, except IIM-L), and then, as soon as the professor asked us to start, one guy jumped in with the example of Edison, without even bothering to greet everyone else or mention the topic. I think at least half the people in the group must have thought of Edison’s example, and rued the fact that they missed the chance to start the GD with it.

On the whole, the discussion was again quite healthy, with almost no instances of cross-talking. However, just like last time, someone brought in Ratan Tata and his Nano car quite soon into the GD (I am not sure whether Tata and Ambani are really the favourites of so many people, or they do it just because they think that works well in a b-school GD, or because they have been conditioned to think of these examples by a daily dose of business news for a long period of time). Anyway, I soon grabbed an opportunity, and using someone else’s point that success also means conviction and belief in one’s ideas, I brought in the example of Mahatma Gandhi, who was literally beaten down in South Africa but got up and proved that his method of agitation could work. Later, when someone said that there is a thin line between success and failure, I gave the example of Columbus, whose discovery of America could be termed a success or failure depending on how you looked at it. On the whole, I think my performance was not outstanding, but definitely better than in the IIM-L GD.

After the GD, I was away from the rest of my group for most of the time, only occasionally coming in to check how many people had finished their interviews. Soon, my turn came, and I entered the interview room. From here on, let’s refer to the professors as P1 (sitting to my right) and P2 (left).

P1: (After asking me to sit down, etc.) Please show me your certificates.
(I open the folder and hand it to him)
P1: (takes it and starts flipping through it) OK, so tell us about yourself.
Me: (Umm.. ok, this is quite regular) Sir, my name is … . graduated from IIT Bombay in 2006. … (standard blah blah) … and then, after graduating, I prepared and appeared for the IAS exams. I appeared in the Main exam in October 2007, and now, after appearing for CAT and getting all six calls, I am here. (I have now decided to ‘take the bull by its horns’ in all future interviews, by bringing in on my own the fact that I prepared for IAS, without waiting for it to come up somehow during the interview)

OK, I am forgetting the exact order of questions, so I’ll keep switching from the conversational mode to the paragraph mode, and vice versa. So, on hearing that, they asked general questions about what subjects I took, why I took those, etc. They also mentioned that in the morning slot, there was a candidate who had appeared four times for the IAS exams, but never managed anything better than the Indian Postal Service. I made it clear that this was my second and last attempt. He asked what I would do in case I got IFS or IAS, and several IIM calls, I hesitated, he said, ‘go on.. be honest. in fact, we will be happy if you say you would prefer the IAS’. I said, I am not sure, I would rather focus on doing well right now, and waiting for the results before deciding, because I ‘do not want to count my chickens before they hatch’. He smiled on hearing that, and asked me why I appeared for it in the first place. I mentioned two reasons: I would like to represent my country, and that I am interested in the field of international politics and diplomacy.
By this time, he had removed my IIT transcript from my folder and opened it up to see all my grades (danger!!!), and he casually mentioned that I did not seem to have liked my physics courses too much. I mumbled something about relative grading, etc. and then he noticed that I had a course on ‘Globalization: A Social Perspective’ in my final semester.

P1: Oh, so you had this course. OK, so tell me, there is currently a school of thought which says that before increasing FDI in any sector, we must increase domestic savings. What is your take on that?
(I start off on globalization and liberalization, and how some people are against it, he stops me and repeats his question, and says he is looking for a specific answer, I confess that I don’t know too much of economics, but I take the example of FDI in retail, and how it can affect our neighbourhood grocers, how in the last 15 years, the gap between rich and poor has widened, he stops me again and makes his question more specific, I say that ’saving is a private virtue but a public vice’, so people should not just put their money at home, but invest it somewhere, he stops me again)
P1: No, what I mean is that if you have increased foreign investment in some sector, and production grows, then you need people to consume those products also, else we might have a higher supply and lower demand. So, shouldn’t consumption be increased instead of savings?
Me: Sir, but on the other hand, it can also cause higher demand and lower supply, which can cause inflation. So, I think the current balance of consumption and savings is good.
P1: What do you think is the current rate of savings?
Me: Sir, I am not so sure…
P1: No no, make a guess. What percentage do you think does an average Indian save?
Me: Umm.. maybe around 20-25%.
P1: (smiles) That’s an intelligent guess, and quite close to the actual answer. So, you think this is ideal?
(I say yes, and mention how decreasing it further and promoting consumption can cause problems. I mention the example of US somewhere, so he asks me to guess their rate of savings, and then China’s. I make a decent guess for the US (5-10%), but not for China. (I guessed 15-20%, but he said it is higher than India’s. I should have known… after all, any rapidly growing economy will have a higher rate of investment to fund its infrastructure expansion, etc.))
P1: So tell me, will you, as a future bureaucrat, promote policies that encourage savings, like pension funds, life insurance policies, tax-saving investments, etc.?
Me: (Ahh.. now I get why he asked this whole question) Sir, I think the current balance is good and it should be maintained.
P1: That is a very diplomatic answer. So, will you increase the 80C ceiling from 1 lakh to 5 lakhs?
Me: No sir, not in one go, but of course, it has to keep up with the other growth in the economy.
P1: What is the current GDP growth rate for India?
Me: Sir, it was 9.4%, but now, the forecast for next year is 8.7%.
P1: Is it real or nominal?
Me: (I have no idea, but hazard a guess) Sir, I think.. nominal. (on seeing him frowning, I clarify) I mean.. it is not adjusted for inflation.
P1: Oh.. so if China is growing at a faster rate, all we have to do to catch up is increase inflation?
(BIG BLOOPER… don’t try such tricks in your interview)
Me: (sheepishly) No sir. Actually, I am not sure.
P1: (smiles) It is the real growth rate. Anyway, (turns to P2, who by this time had got bored, stood up and was pacing around the table) do you have anything to ask?
P2: (comes and sits down with this serious look) Hmm.. so tell me, you have appeared for the IAS exams, right? I also take interviews for those candidates, and I know the whole selection process. Do you have any suggestions for changing that process?
Me: Sir, I have heard that there is a proposal to conduct an exam for 17-18 year olds after class 12, who would then be trained for 5 years after that. Even if that channel is opened, I think the current channel should be kept open. Coming to the current process, I think that the upper age limit should be reduced from 30. However, it should be relaxed for someone who is appearing for it after some relevant work experience, and he should get credit for that. Also, I am sure the UPSC must be having its reasons, but I do not understand why we have to choose two subjects for the Main exam, when it doesn’t matter for your future career, as everyone is trained afresh, and everyone is on the same plane.
P1: OK, what do you think is the reason behind the current process?
(I said that I know that the prelims tests your breadth of knowledge, while the Mains tests the depth. Also, they see how well you can cope with some subject that you have not studied formally. Some more discussion ensued, during which I mentioned that in the current process, people go on appearing for the exam till the age of 30, and they also make it difficult for others. For example, I have heard from people who have a Master’s in Economics from DSE, etc. that what they study is very different from what is required for the UPSC exams. So, if those studies are not relevant to your future career, and they are not in tune with what is taught in the top institutions in the country, there is something that needs to be changed)
P2: You see.. they have a rationale behind each step in the process. When it was originally designed, it was not only for IITians (Umm.. but I never made it sound like that.. anyways). So, they do this (… blah blah blah … lots of gyaan about the whole process, and the reasons behind it).

Finally, both of them say, ‘all the best, we hope you get through the IAS, because we can see that you have the potential, etc.’ and I am like ‘i hope this does not mean that they are not going to take me here’, but anyway, I just say ‘thank you’ and leave.

General thoughts: It was definitely more interesting than the IIM-L GD/PI, but that could be because my turn came towards the end of the day over there, so those professors must have been tired, unlike these ones. Anyway, the first BIG one, IIM-A, is on Saturday, and I have a train to catch for Ahmedabad in a couple of hours. I shall be back with that experience sometime next Monday or Tuesday.